What are some of the main differences between the two programs. I picked up Music Creator 6 during the summer sale a few weeks ago, and it's pretty nice. Are there any significant differences between the two programs, and can they also can they be used together? Thanks!

That's pretty much some ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥t comparison, Cakewalk has been around for longer than Image-Line (Cakewalk was founded in 1987, Image-Line in 1994), and MC6 Touch is based around Sonar X2, which is, aside from being more expensive, also a bit more professional than FL Studio. At least do a bit of research before you start telling ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥t.

Aside from that, the main difference is that FL Studio most likely is mainly built for stage performance, and MC6 Touch (and by extension Sonar X2) more for (amateur) studio recordings. You can basically see it in the plugins included in each. FL Studio mostly has plugins that are built around doing stuff on the fly (like effects plugins and the likes), while MC6 Touch mostly has stuff that can and should be used during production (as its plugins are mainly virtual instruments).

This doesn't mean either is better, and it also doesn't mean they can't do what the other can. Both can be extended with (VST) plugins from either company (it's even possible to include FL Studio as a VSTi inside MC6 Touch, although why in heaven's name you'd want to build such a monstrosity I'm not sure).

In the end, it depends on your end goal. Are you more of a producer or a performer?

As Gary said.... There's nothing *more* professional about Sonar, the workflows are just different. It also depends on which versions are boing compared. If comparing Music Creator 6 to any of the FL bundles but "Fruity Edition", FL is fully featured (as oppose to MC which is cut down as fr as core functionality is concerned). If you start comparing X3 (latest Sonar) and FL Producer, you're pretty much on a lelvel playing field as far as featured are concerned. They just get to the same relative destination in different ways. Anyway, FL Prod (and Sig) and X3 are both much more complicated than MC, so that another consideration. The other consideration is what kind of music you make. Sonar is generlly more geared toward tracking (think recording a band), where FL is more based around EDM and such, moer straight forward "simpler" integration of things EDM guys would use more often ie. the piano roll in FL is GODLY, literally nothing else comes close to it's functionality, not even Cubase (seriously, once you've worked with FL's piano roll, you wish it could be the same in other DAWs, quite unparalleled in functionality). Therefore the choise should be made based on what you find more confortable to work with pared with what music you do (of course there's also the option to mixing and matching DAW, heck, I do it heaps). Naturally you can make what you want on your chosen DAW style wise, as long as it works for you.

I would however also add that FL and Sonar / MC is equally geare for live and production, so that's not quite on th money as stated above (in fact, FL only recently got clip triggering ability).Out of al DAWs, from my experience, Live is the most geared toward live stuff (although excells in the production environment as well... in the right hands... not mine XD).

@OP Demo FL, (you can get the FL producer demo off FL's site) and decide for yourself.

Just for a bit of background, I've been producing for just over 13 years, in band related setups and as an EDM producer, have both Sonar X3 (+extras), FL Studio signature (+ extras), and a few other DAW as well (not Live though although it's heavily gearered toward EDM, it just doesn't suit my workflow, so I choose not to work with it). On the side I do beta testing for VST devs + factory patch bank sound design, most notably recently: Tone2 Audio, Rob Papen Synths (will be doing fatory patches for Blue II soon), KV331audio SynthMaster, Camel Audio:Alchemy, Revealsound: Spire (great synth but hectic CPU) , Humanoid Sound: Enzyme (in Beta now) etc.